CRT Vs LCD

[cell]

This might be an awkward question for this age, since everybody is looking for LCD, which already had very decent price. But, i would like the people who had used both to share their experience, if the main purpose is to read article and surf online, maybe some pictures and videos. Here i mean reading very long time on the screen. As for this goal and with concerning the eye health, is CRT better than LCD, say 22 inch CRT vs 19 LCD? To me, CRT's refreshing rate is high, so this is good for eyes, right; while LCD usually has fixed refreshing rate and is low. Therefore, in this sense, CRT is better, right?

Anyone like to share your experience.

 

[sturm]

I have a 19 inch crt, .22 dot pitch runing like 85 hz refresh. Its about 6 years old
I also have a 17 inch sony lcd. about a year old
Text on the lcd is much more crisp. Refresh rate on lcds isnt problem. Ghosting is the problem on some lcd. I notice it on mine in fast action games. Crt doesnt have that problem.
Lcd are also limited on their resolution. Some have max of 1024x768, some 1280X1024, Some may go higher but their going to cost you.
My crt will do 1600x1200. Never use it that high but it can do it.

If your mainly doing text, web, pictures then an lcd is right for you. If your gameing then youll need to get the highend lcd that has a fast response time or go with at least a 19 inch crt - if you can find them.

 

[cell]

Thank you for sharing your experience. Now, I have CRT (17), I used it everyday, i don't have big problem. I also often use LCD in the library, sometime I feel a little dizzy if I used it too long. That is why I come up this question, 'cause i would like to build a new PC in the near future. Though I am really attracted by LCD, i hesitate to get a LCD. From what you said, it seems OK if I get a LCD, probably a high quality one. How about dell 1905FP, or viewsonic VP9 series.

 

[d3vNULL]

As far as I can tell LCDs are easier on the eyes. While the refresh rate is technically lower on a CRT an LCD's refresh is much different from CRTs. The CRT "scans" from top to bottom, while the LCD updates individual pixels. The scanning action of the CRT creates a flicker, which is the cause of eye strain.

 

[dorion]

Cell you say you get a little dizzy from LCDs, it probably has to do with the backlight of the LCD which is most likely a fluorescent tube running at... is it 120 or 240 Hz? But anyways I know people that get dizzy from fluorescent lights and the same applies for LCDs.

But good job buying CRT they have great colors and if you ever think about gaming you'll love it.

 

[luminaris]

I used to use (still have one of them) NEC 19 inch CRTs. Now I have two Samsung 930b 19 inch LCDs and i'm glad I made the switch. I game alot and I have never seen any ghosting at all. The pictures are much brighter, very crisp and the adjustments are much greater.

LCD technology is getting so much better these days. I would never go back to CRTs again.

 

[GreenDragon]

Both types have Pros & Cons. I opted for this flat screen CRT & I am really pleased with it's performance.Best BANG for the Buck as far as I am concerned.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Mitsubishi-2060U-22-FLAT-CRT-Monitor-FREE-SHIPPING_W0QQitemZ8768063213QQcategoryZ41807QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Bob F

 

[tsf]

i read somewhere that samsung is gonna stop makin CRT and drop the prices of LCD by 50% (becomes same as CRT,even less). other companies might follow.

besides, LCDs aren't that bad, its good for gamin an everything that u do.

(some guy earlier mentioned restricted resolution problem, who would wanna play FEAR in more than 1280x1024 anyways!!)

 

[dvdpiddy]

dude the only reason crts still have a market is for the average gamer they dont ghost and they have better response time

 

[Onus]

I generally agree with Sturm. That library LCD may have been the cheapest they could find, and poor response time could be responsible for initial fuzziness as text scrolls, leading to eyestrain. Otherwise, the flicker of a CRT with a too-low refresh rate creates much more eyestrain than a LCD, which doesn't flicker; comments about backlighting notwithstanding. Placement and viewing angle can often compensate for that, but a low refresh rate is a done deal.
I currently use a 18" LCD at home, and I'm happy with it. My primary game is Guild Wars, so I'm not too concerned with frame rate (although I know it's high on my system). The LCD is a lot easier on my eyes for text. I can also stare at my 17" LCD at work all day and not have eyestrain.

 

[cell]

Thank you for your input, Jtt283. So, i can make up my mind to go for a LCD, since it will be good for eyedrain when doing text reading. I think I will go for a better quality one. Would you guys have any suggestions. Is Dell 1905FP a good one, 'cause you can always get some good deal from them.

 

[Terr0rFish]

make sure whatever LCD u buy, it has a response time of 12ms or faster.
i have 2 here, both acer 19" LCD's. one has 16ms and one 12ms and the
differents is really visable. nowadays there are 2ms LCD's out there, but
they are damn expensive and imho a 12ms is good enough for the usual
stuff like surfing, reading etc. even gaming, but if u have enough money
go for a 8ms one.

the contrast on the other hand should be as high as possible, mine has
500:1 and thats good imho, but i dont really have any other to compare lol

btw. imho a cheap CRT can be as bad as a cheap LCD.
ive had lots of CRT's in my life and the best one was a 1000 buck expensive
17" sony CRT and the wrost was a 1200 bucks 21" sony CRT lol (E500)

one thing always to remember is to set up your screen so you look slightly
down onto it. because if u have to look up, even if its just a lil, ur eyes will
dry out and eventually hurt.

 

[bourgeoisdude]

CRTs rule. Only CRTs will last you 6 years without any worries--LCDs? What can I say--I just got off the phone with someone calling it in only 3 months after release...

Yeah brands, care taken, and sheer luck determine how long most last, and yep there are some white-plastic shell LCDs that are still workin (you know, those $1400 15" 800X600 pixel LCDs from 1998). About 4 of them in the US I think :lol: :lol: :lol:

CRTs are more reliable and dependable IMO. Dropped two of em but they dont stop working. Again some models suck but the common ones (Dell E771/E772/E773 17" CRTs, HP 17" CRTs, Compaq 19" CRT screens, my favorite the 19" "MagView" .24 dot pitch CRTs) work for over 5 years. Dell E171/E172/E173s, those god-aweful 1703FPTs (dell and hp), and every other "common" LCD around seem to have about one in 20 break withen two years. Not too bad but compare to the CRTs!

 

[thebunny]

I would say LCD is the better choice
My samsung 730bf is great for gaming and better for the eyes 8)
my brother uses an 21" IBM(sony trinitron) and It does not impress me
LCD tehnology has evolved so BUY AN LCD

 

[zyzplasmaz]

definitely get a LCD, after using a LCD, i cant even stand CRT monitors anymore. the benefits of a lcd is more then the cons. it's lighter, smaller footprint, less power and the price has drop that alot of companies are lowering their CRT output and focusing more on LCD. so what if you need to run at it's native resolution, how often do you change the resolution after you set it? just set it to the native resolution and you'll get use to it in a week or so.
PS while a CRT might work after 5years, the quality deteriates the longer you have it, just look at those 14" CRT you have lying in the closet... or at least that was with old CRT, not sure if the newer ones still do it but either way, i have LCDs that are 3yr old and they're still going strong and after 3-4 yrs it's time to upgrade anyways

 

[Onus]

I'm still using my first LCD, a cheap 18" model. I've had it for three years now I think. When/if it dies, I'll likely get another. I'm running it at 1024x768; I think it goes a little higher, but my eyes prefer this res.

 

[cell]

All right, all in all, it sounds like LCD should be the way to go. Thanks very much for all your guys' input.

 

[doublehelix]

Now I have two Samsung 930b 19 inch LCDs and i'm glad I made the switch.

Same here!! I have two Samsung 930b 19" LCDs and LOVE EM!!! Ghosting is non-existent on these monitors. And I love the fact that I have more control via either buttons on monitor or control via software in nVidia...

I'll never go back to CRT. Personally, the color is not as rich and actually off-hue on the CRT. LCD is sharp and very rich. I did turn down the brightness quite a bit on the LCD, though.

 

[Sekeru]

This link will proberbly help on what to buy
http://pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,123858,00.asp

 

[krazyderek]

Now I have two Samsung 930b 19 inch LCDs and i'm glad I made the switch.

Same here!! I have two Samsung 930b 19" LCDs and LOVE EM!!! Ghosting is non-existent on these monitors. And I love the fact that I have more control via either buttons on monitor or control via software in nVidia...

I'm on the samsung ban waggon to, i have the 910n, the predecessor to the 930b.

Key things to look at for lcd's are:

700:1 or higher contrast. I actually returned two 500:1 monitors cause they just didn't appeal to me or my eyes

12ms or lower response time, or your eyes will get WAY to soar watching full screen video

The third i can't beleive other people didn't mention was uniformity, i returned one lcd because of this, usualy it's the top and botom of the screen that i notice the most if the center is to bright. See the various tomshardware 19" lcd roundups for details on this.

I love my sam 910n, the 930b is probably tweaked a bit more, but essentially the same panel... i've been thinking quite a bit about getting a second one myself.

As mentioned above, lcd's are lighter and smaller incase you need to get at cables behind your monitor, or slide the monitor out of your way. They use less energy, that means longer life on your backup UPS units. And they also put out little to no radiation compared to CRT's.

 

[Son_of_Blob]

It's still a case of "horses for courses", I think.

Although LCDs have improved greatly in recent years, for some applications, pro quality CRTs that use aperture grill tubes ("Trinitron" type screens) and are capable of 100hz plus refresh rates are are still superior, most especially for photographic and DTP work. Most LCDs just don't have the colour range and brightness uniformity, as well as the true blacks and rendering of dark colours for photo and publication work (they also are not capable of rendering Adobe RGB colour space for pre-press DTP work). Also, the bang for buck you get with a 19 or 21 inch CRT pro monitor these days is outstanding. I'm still using a Philips 109P aperture grill monitor that is nearly six years old and its colour vibrancy is still perfect, because of the longer lasting phosphors used on the screen (plus its fine tuning capabilities). When not being used for magazine/photo work it also makes a truly great gaming monitor....and I can select any resolution from 640*480 up to 1920*1440 with no interpolation, i.e it's always pin sharp. LCDs usually look awful when not being used in their native resolution.

New, my CRT cost over $1,500 Australian dollars...I can buy one now for half that, maybe even less .

Shadow-mask CRTs, especially cheap ones, are dreadful by comparison though and are easily bettered by the newer crop of 12/8ms LCDs for surfing the net and gaming etc.

It's all a matter of usage and price/peformance ratios, not to mention the fact that LCDs don't last all that long and come with the extra headache of the dreaded "dead pixels"...which do my head in when retouching photos on someone else's screen.

 

[Clob]

You can find quality CRT's (Trinitron/Diamdontron) for dirt cheap on Ebay. Because CRT's are so reliable, I have no fear buying a slightly used CRT monitor. Shoot, My 19" Viewsonic is 6 years old and has ben through absolute hell all its life and the picture is still as good as day 1. It is just now starting to show its wear.

Now I have no problem with LCD's, except uniformity witch realy bothers me; I will never chose one over a CRT for straight visiual quality and duribility.

 

[papau]

As far as your eyes go its a LCD that is easyer and Better on the eyes
A CRT monitor is a Cathoid Ray Tube . Giveing off more x rays and Gamma rays than you know ..lol.thats why your eyes burn or itch after long exsposure to CRT mostly in the dark . LCD or liqued crystel display " sorry bout the spelling " is easy on the eyes it needs a back light just for you to see it .Like looking at a digital watch its harmless ..Now sit back from that tv or it will hurt your eyes !...lol Basic question here is not LCD vs CRT But rather whats the best viewing distance ....

 

[cell]

What you said is true, but recently I read a review comparing LCD with CRT for screen reading. It said there is another problem for LCD, 'cause usually LCD is very bright, about 250 ucm (sorry, maybe the unit is not quite correct). However, for reading purpose, doctor suggest 90 ucm is good enough for the eyes.(CRT usually like this). So, sometime, when you read too long in front of LCD, you will also feel eye drain 'cause of its brightness. So, I am wondering if it is possible to lower the LCD btightness, but that may make it very "ugly", right?

As far as your eyes go its a LCD that is easyer and Better on the eyes
A CRT monitor is a Cathoid Ray Tube . Giveing off more x rays and Gamma rays than you know ..lol.thats why your eyes burn or itch after long exsposure to CRT mostly in the dark . LCD or liqued crystel display " sorry bout the spelling " is easy on the eyes it needs a back light just for you to see it .Like looking at a digital watch its harmless ..Now sit back from that tv or it will hurt your eyes !...lol Basic question here is not LCD vs CRT But rather whats the best viewing distance ....

 

[cell]

By the way, my dell 700m seemed like this. When I read it very long, i felt uncomfortable after i move my eye out of the screen.